The social relations model (SRM) can be viewed as an application of the generalizability theory to data obtained from interpersonal, reciprocal designs. The SRM explicitly accounts for several of the accuracy components suggested by Cronbach (1955), but it also addresses other features of person perception like consensus, self-other agreement, metapercep-tion, and reciprocity. According to Kenny (1994), accuracy research must be nomothetic, interpersonal, and componential—the SRM fulfills these requirements: The model is nomothetic in that it measures accuracy for a given trait instead of individual differences in accuracy of judgments. The SRM is componential, because judgment and criterion are divided into components, and accuracy is estimated through the correspondence between the sets of components. Finally, the SRM is interpersonal and explicitly acknowledges the two-sided nature and reciprocity of interpersonal perception, where people are both judges and targets at the same time. Consistent with Cronbach's suggestions, the SRM examines the accuracy among informants' ratings of single personality traits instead of measuring accuracy across profiles of traits. Unlike Cronbach's approach, however, the SRM does not consider the accuracy of a single informant, but rather focuses on accuracy for a given trait across a set of informants and targets. The employment of the SRM, therefore, requires a "round-robin" design, in which all informants rate all targets. Alternatively, one may also apply a "block" design, in which participants are divided in two groups, and each participant rates all members of the other group.
The components of accuracy are estimated in a fashion similar to Cronbach's approach. In particular, four types of accuracy are distinguished (see Figure 4.2; Kenny, 1994; Kenny & Albright, 1987). Elevation accuracy pertains to the match between the informants' average response set and the average response on the criterion rating in terms of self- or other judgments, which is virtually equivalent to the difference between overall means of the judgment and the criterion (across all informants and targets). Perceiver accuracy refers to the correspondence between the informant's average response and the average score of targets. Generalized accuracy reflects how a person is generally viewed by others (i.e., specifically, the correlation between how one is generally predicted to behave and how he or she actually behaves). According to Kenny (1994), this kind of accuracy probably corresponds most closely to a naive understanding of accuracy. The final component, dyadic accuracy, concerns an informant's unique prediction of a target's behavior, over and above the prediction of other informants. Consider a group of job applicants rating each other's cooperativeness in an assessment center task. Whereas elevation accuracy simply reflects the extent to which the mean evaluation of cooperativeness across perceivers and targets meets the mean criterion level of cooperation, the perceiver accuracy shows how a perceiver's
Was this article helpful?